PrepTest 135

[lcid:3638] Prep Test 135 LSAT — Reading Comp — S3 Reading comp

Passage

Questions 20-27  .        As part of an international effort to address  . environmental problems resulting from agricultural  . overproduction, Remaining source text redacted.
Passage walkthrough
Passage Summary

Topic: Science


Paragraph 1

  • Paragraph note
    • Environmental problems from overproduction in Europe (depleted nutrients, fertilization encourages problem weeds) and some solutions (replace topsoil, end production, accelerated restoration)
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Cause-and-effect relationships, according to the author:
      • Overproduction causes the depletion of nutrients, among other environmental problems (first and second sentences)
      • Overfertilization causes the growth of problem weeds, which make it difficult for native plants to establish themselves (third sentence)
    • Author's view:
      • The quickest solution is removing and replacing the topsoil, but that is impractical on a large scale (fourth sentence)
      • Most people believe that doing nothing will allow the soil to restore itself, but the Netherlands study is trying to accelerate this natural rehab (last sentence)
    • Author's attitude: "environmental problems" (first sentence); "will be difficult" (second sentence); "problem weeds" (third sentence); "impractical" (fourth sentence); "generally believed" (last sentence)

Paragraph 2

  • Paragraph note
    • Netherlands study described (plots planted with native grasses/herbs have fewer thistles)
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Comparison, according to the study:
      • One the control plots planted with nothing or corn, thistles became dominant; on the plots planted with native grasses/herbs, thistles were forced out (first through last sentence)

Paragraph 3

  • Paragraph note
    • Conclusion from additional stage of the Netherlands study (spreading beneficial microorganisms and native herbs/grasses restores soil more quickly)
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Comparison, according to the study:
      • Researchers spread untouched soil (which has beneficial microorganisms) into the plots and found the plots with native herbs/grasses and the soil fared better than plots with just native herbs/grasses, but not as well as unfarmed soil (first and second sentences)
    • Researchers' view:
      • Farmed soil has harmful organisms and no good ones, so we can accelerate soil's restoration by returning beneficial microorganisms (which fight the harmful organisms) and native herbs/grasses (third through last sentences)
    • Examples of beneficial organisms, according to the author:
      • Nematodes, mycorrhiza (first and third sentences)
    • Author's attitude: "beneficial microorganisms" (first sentence); "preliminary results" (fourth sentence); "hinges on" (fourth sentence)

Main Point: Studies by researchers in the Netherlands have shown that the natural restoration of ecological health can be accelerated by sowing beneficial microorganisms into the soil while planting a wide variety of native seeds.

Meta-Structure?

Problem/Solution: This passage is an interesting variation on the Problem/Solution Meta-Structure. It introduces a problem — the environmental problems associated with agricultural overproduction — and it explores a spectrum of solutions. These vary from the non-workable (removing and replacing all of the topsoil) to the slow (do nothing and let nature run its course) to the speculative one promoted by the study from the Netherlands.

In general, the main point of a Problem/Solution passage will be the author's preferred solution or, absent that, their opinion on the main solution. In this case, the author doesn't really express their preference for or even their opinion on any of the solutions. Therefore, the main point will simply summarize the solution that the passage dedicates the most space to — the speculative solution from the Netherlands studies. We'll need to make sure the main point mentions that any conclusions drawn from the study are held by those researchers, not the author. Those conclusions are summarized in the last sentence of the passage, which we used to construct our anticipated main point.

Last Thoughts?

Each paragraph involves a lot of detail and will require a lot of checking in the questions. In Paragraph 1, that's the list of contributing factors to the problem and the different solutions noted. In Paragraph 2, there are the differences between the four types of plots and their results. In Paragraph 3, that's micro...mycro...mycorrhiza? It's the difficult details around the harmful microorganisms, especially since the paragraph also talks about beneficial microorganisms. Let's be sure to rely heavily on the passage to help us on the detail-oriented questions.

Question prompt

It can be inferred Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right

Credited answer: C

The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.

Question Type

Science

Strategy Overview

Review the main point and any relevant parts of the passage and notes, if necessary, to anticipate what might happen in the scenario described

Answer Anticipation

For questions that ask us to infer, from a few details in the passage, what must be true in a novel situation, we can start by quickly finding and reviewing those details. Once we review that part of the passage, we can anticipate what might happen in the hypothetical situation described. We should consider how the hypothetical situation applies to what we reviewed and whether it might follow a similar or distinct pattern to that described in the passage.So, this question asks us what would happen if the disease organisms mentioned in the third sentence of the third paragraph were eliminated in a plot of land that had been in constant agricultural use. Before we refer to that part of the passage, there are two things we can anticipate. First, they are literally called "disease organisms," so removing them will probably do something good. Second, this question implicitly asks about causality since it's asking about the effects of removing something.Heading to the third paragraph, we can see that it's in a sentence that starts with, "Researchers have concluded that this is because," referring back to the previous sentence (P3, S3). So what is "this"? It's the results of comparing three types of plots. The first type had been heavily farmed and then was seeded with soil that hadn't been overfarmed and had good microorganisms (P2, S2). The second type had been overfarmed and wasn't seeded with good soil (P2, S2). The third type was the soil that hadn't been overfarmed (P2, S2).Of these, the third type saw the best plant growth, followed by the first, with the second coming in last. And, with this in mind, we can see where the disease organisms asked about come into play. The researchers explain these results by saying that the first and second types of plots had a lot of disease organisms growing in them (P3, S3). Since those organisms explain why the plots didn't have as good seed growth as the "natural" plot, we can infer that removing those organisms will result in plants growing better. Let's find an answer stating that.

Answer choices

  1. A
    Populations of symbiotic mycorrhiza Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A is not credited

    (A) Does this say that eliminating the disease organisms would cause plants to grow better?

    Nope. Besides, "symbiotic mycorrhiza" was an example of a beneficial organism (P3, S3). The passage never causally connects the good and bad microorganisms — their populations may not affect each other.

  2. B
    Unwanted plant species like Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B is not credited

    (B) Does this say that eliminating the disease organisms would cause plants to grow better?

    No. In fact, this answer choice doesn't make much sense. Why would getting rid of disease organisms stop plants from surviving? Nothing in the passage suggests that thistles need these disease organisms to survive, so this answer is incorrect.

  3. C
    The chance of survival Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C matches the stem

    (C) Does this say that eliminating the disease organisms would cause plants to grow better?

    Yes! The passage says the lower rate of native plant seeds growing on certain plots is related to the higher level of disease organisms in those plots (P3, S3). As such, removing the disease organisms should help those native plant seeds grow. This answer is, therefore, correct. We would be justified in selecting it and advancing to the next question.

  4. D
    The number of all Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D is not credited

    (D) Does this say that eliminating the disease organisms would cause plants to grow better?

    No. This answer is wrong for similar reasons to (A). There's no connection between positive and negative microorganisms in the passage, so we can't infer that removing the negative microorganisms would have any effect on the positive ones.

  5. E
    Populations of other types Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E is not credited

    (E) Does this say that eliminating the disease organisms would cause plants to grow better?

    Nope. There's no indication that there are other disease organisms that can live in soil, let alone an indication that getting rid of these disease organisms would result in others moving in.

What this tests

Discussion

View all discussions Start a discussion